John Mace Says: "Americans are too stupid to educate themselves..."

[PlainJain]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

John doesn’t have an ideology.

Now John’s left leanings know what his right leanings are doing.

[elucidator]

Hell, only way to get that man down off the fence is to set fire to it.

[Bryan_Ekers]

@Le_Jacquelope

I ran into the SAME bullshit when I said Bush’s tax cuts wouldn’t work the way they were intended (and they didn’t), I ran into the same universal “you’re a jerk” when I said that subprime mortgages were going to lead to disaster (and they did), and the same loathing when I said the subprime CRASH was going to lead to a financial panic (and Lord, did it ever).

Did you make these (rather mild) predictions in a jerkish way?

[XT]

Certainly he did…after all, he made them in this very thread (retroactively, to be sure, but accurate, as far as they go), and you could see what a jerk he was making them…

-XT

[Le_Jacquelope]

@Little_Nemo

Why don’t you apply the same logic.

1. Most of the people in the country have not expressed an opinion of whether or not you’re an idiot.
2. The people in this thread have expressed a consensus that you’re an idiot.
3. In the absense of any evidence of what the entire country thinks about you, we’ll assume that the evidence of this thread is generally applicable.
4. Therefore, everyone in the entire country thinks you’re an idiot.

Wow, this is what passes for logic in the cartoonish world that is your mind?

Most Americans think the pro-offshoring mentality most of you guys hold is full of shit. And FEW people hold the same definition of left-winger as whoever classified John Mace as such. Leftists vehemently oppose offshoring. But if you weren’t a bunch of flaming idiots you’d know that.

@Bryan_Ekers

Did you make these (rather mild) predictions in a jerkish way?

Mild?! Do you realize that there’s a BUNCHA economic experts who also predicted these things and were wildly called Dr. Doom, chicken little, etc.? Only a fool would call those predictions mild in light of how the world saw them before they came to pass. The word you’re looking for is “dire”, not “mild”.

Regardless, the consequences of the ever-shrinking middle class, 10 years (and counting) of anemic job growth and wage growth, and a budget we can’t even get below $400 deficit even with deep and painful Federal budget cuts, will pretty much prove everything I’ve been saying. By then you’ll probably be too busy choking on your words to care about the fact that I told you so.

Oh and history doesn’t judge jerks nearly as harshly as it judges incompetence. You’re incompetent. I’m a jerk. But I’m a jerk who is well-prepared, too. If you’re right, this job market will serve me well (because my customers will have more money and thus assets for me to insure) and if I’m right then I’ve already made friends with farmers, so my family is taken care of. Can you say that?

[elucidator]

@Le_Jacquelope

… and thus assets for me to insure) …

*…**Jack’*s the surest blending of Capital and Communist
He is the very model of an actuarial Trotskyist…

With apologies…

[Little_Nemo]

@Le_Jacquelope

Okay… and? They don’t like my arguments. But what I’m saying is true, and it’s going to bite the entire pro-offshoring community on their ass.

I ran into the SAME bullshit when I said Bush’s tax cuts wouldn’t work the way they were intended (and they didn’t), I ran into the same universal “you’re a jerk” when I said that subprime mortgages were going to lead to disaster (and they did), and the same loathing when I said the subprime CRASH was going to lead to a financial panic (and Lord, did it ever). Matter of fact, I put my JOB on the line fighting in meetings to keep my employer (a community bank) from getting deep into the subprime market. I got far worse from the owners and the (former) higher-ups than any of you will ever throw at me, combined.

So again, I say… and? What’s your point? Fucktard.

Bad news. Most people on this board agree with your politics. It’s your personality that’s a problem.

[Little_Nemo]

@Le_Jacquelope

Wow, this is what passes for logic in the cartoonish world that is your mind?

No. I was basically just making fun of you. In the cartoonish world of my mind you’re basically a butt monkey. Like Elmer Fudd but not as endearing.

[John_Mace]

@elucidator

Hell, only way to get that man down off the fence is to set fire to it.

You know, it’s really tiresome this thing about the fence. I’m not in favor of either party. That doesn’t mean I’m on the fence. It means that you can’t think beyond he simplistic dichotomy of left/right.

[Le_Jacquelope]

@Little_Nemo

No. I was basically just making fun of you. In the cartoonish world of my mind

Do you even realize just how honest you were about yourself right up to this point?

And regarding my personality - you know, I’m not one for popularity contests. I’m for telling it like it is. I’m one of those ‘angry liberals’ - you know, the ones with backbones. Someone who don’t let people like John Mace spout his bullshit and then double-bullshit his way back out like he did here without calling him on it.

Popularity contests got us exactly what happened to Barack Obama and the Democrats in Congress. IOW: stuff it. Deep.

[Little_Nemo]

Do you even realize just how honest you were about yourself right up to this point?

By saying I was making fun of you? Heck, everyone’s making fun of you - and not just here - so I hardly deserve special credit for that.

[elucidator]

…It means that you can’t think beyond he simplistic dichotomy of left/right.

Well, that’s certainly one explanation. The other is that you cling to a “non-partisan” label (as do many others, to be sure) as if “non-partisan” were, in and of itself proof of some virtue.

Now, in a situation of rough equivalence, you would have a point. But no such situation exists. On the one hand you have a party with its share of fools, to be sure, and human failings abound. And a party hobbled by a leadership that is menshevik, “centrist”, “business friendly” Clintonista and three-legged blue dead dogs.

And the other party is a fountain of stupidity and mean-spiritedness, an avalanche of catastrophes financial, social, and international. And again, you’ve agreed with us, yeppers, that was a Very Bad Thing. Over and over. Time and again. Same Republicans, different day.

Perhaps there is an equivalence here that escapes my dim perceptions. But I’m damned if I know why you think so.

[Bryan_Ekers]

@Le_Jacquelope

Mild?! Do you realize that there’s a BUNCHA economic experts who also predicted these things and were wildly called Dr. Doom, chicken little, etc.? Only a fool would call those predictions mild in light of how the world saw them before they came to pass. The word you’re looking for is “dire”, not “mild”.

Well, how mild or dire these predictions were is a direct function of exactly when you made them, but in any case it doesn’t answer my question: did you make these predictions in a jerkish way?

[Paranoid_Randroid]

@elucidator

Now, in a situation of rough equivalence, you would have a point. But no such situation exists. On the one hand you have a party with its share of fools, to be sure, and human failings abound. […]

And the other party is a fountain of stupidity and mean-spiritedness, an avalanche of catastrophes financial, social, and international. […]

Perhaps there is an equivalence here that escapes my dim perceptions. But I’m damned if I know why you think so.

Wait – I’ll admit that I’ve had little to no interaction with you or John Mace, so maybe there’s some history here with which I am unfamiliar. But where is he drawing an equivalence between the behavior of democrats and republicans? The belief that one party (out of two) is less corrupt is not in contradiction with a failure to agree with that party, either – right?

(For what it’s worth, I find myself in that position: I agree that the conservative party is corrupt and nearly irredeemable, but I simply cannot agree with some of the policies generally espoused by the left. In no way am I drawing an equivalence.)

[elucidator]

We have a number of outreach programs, to help gently guide you away from the paths of political error.

[Tamerlane]

@elucidator

The other is that you cling to a “non-partisan” label (as do many others, to be sure) as if “non-partisan” were, in and of itself proof of some virtue.

Now, in a situation of rough equivalence, you would have a point. But no such situation exists.

Being non-partisan doesn’t imply party equivalence. It just implies a lack of party allegiance, which is a different matter altogether.

I vote mostly for Democrats, because to me the parties are usually not equivalent and I’m a pragmatic sort. However I do not consider myself a member of or advocate for the Democratic Party. I’m not registered as a member, have no loyalty to the party as a organization and find the concept of lockstep “party discipline” distressing and distasteful.

In truth partisanship in a general sense doesn’t bother me at all. After all very few people are truly neutral in life and most of those that are, are either idiots or just terminally incurious. But I do sneer slightly at the rabidly partisan, as I tend to sneer slightly at zealots of all persuasions ( my parents, whom I am otherwise very fond of, included ). Zealotry is unattractive no matter what form it takes.

[LonesomePolecat]

@elucidator

Lacking cognitive skills, they are more likely to emotional decisions, voting for the guy who wraps himself in patriotic bunting and blubbers about how much he loves his country, and why that love of his country compels him to hate so many of its citizens.

Which is entirely different from snarling accusations of racism and blubbering about what’s going to happen to the children if a few thousand bureaucrats are laid off. No, that’s not a cynical appeal to emotion at all. :rolleyes:

[John_Mace]

@elucidator

Well, that’s certainly one explanation. The other is that you cling to a “non-partisan” label (as do many others, to be sure) as if “non-partisan” were, in and of itself proof of some virtue.

No, I don’t. If I ever call myself “non-partisan” (and I doubt I do that very often) it’s a simple statement if fact. I don’t support either party, and have no dog in any fight between the two. My dog is with any given issue. If the Dems are on my side of the issue, I’m with them. If the Pubs are, then I’m with them. But only on that particular issue.

Now, in a situation of rough equivalence, you would have a point. But no such situation exists. On the one hand you have a party with its share of fools, to be sure, and human failings abound. And a party hobbled by a leadership that is menshevik, “centrist”, “business friendly” Clintonista and three-legged blue dead dogs.

And the other party is a fountain of stupidity and mean-spiritedness, an avalanche of catastrophes financial, social, and international. And again, you’ve agreed with us, yeppers, that was a Very Bad Thing. Over and over. Time and again. Same Republicans, different day.

Perhaps there is an equivalence here that escapes my dim perceptions. But I’m damned if I know why you think so.

It’s not so much a matter of equivalence, as that neither party really represents my own views. That’s generally true of most small “l” libertarians. Again, a simple fact.

[Shodan]

@LonesomePolecat

Which is entirely different from snarling accusations of racism and blubbering about what’s going to happen to the children if a few thousand bureaucrats are laid off. No, that’s not a cynical appeal to emotion at all. :rolleyes:

Both sides do stuff like this - it’s just that one side gets most of the condemnation for doing it (on the SDMB).

The disproportionate amount of attention then leads the Usual Suspects to conclude that “Republicans are teh eeeeeevil”. And here we are.

Regards,
Shodan

[Le_Jacquelope]

Well.
Well.
WELL.

It turns out that Americans are not only leaving tech. They’re fleeing the entire scientific and technological industry, overall.

http://blogs.sciencemag.org/sciencecareers/2011/03/an-internal-bra.html

The United States is suffering from a serious scientific and technological workforce problem that harms innovation, according to Norman Matloff of the University of California-Davis computer science department. But it is not the supposed shortage of American scientists and engineers widely bemoaned by politicians and industry representatives.

Rather, because of “an internal brain drain” of able Americans out of scientific and technical fields, “we are wasting our talent,” he told he told an audience of legal and immigration experts, IT workers, and scientists at a March 18 policy briefing held at the Georgetown University Law School. This loss of talent largely results from the nation’s policy of admitting large number of scientists, IT workers, and computer engineers, he said.

We are now in full-blown internal brain-drain mode.